zoidsfandomcom-20200224-history
Talk:Gun Blaster
how is this zoid not a grade up if it has a grade up motor and a grade up port?Leon35 03:31, May 15, 2010 (UTC) I think it's because it dosen't have the ports. (Zoids Fanatic 13:37, May 15, 2010 (UTC)) It doesn't have grade-up anything other than emblems. I'm really not sure how the idea it has a motor/port like them got started. It does have a cool gear...movey...thing going on, but that doesn't make a Zoid part of the line. Pointytilly 00:41, May 16, 2010 (UTC) i read some build reviews. the zoid has a grade up motor and grade up bar but no grade up port. whats a grade up bar? :The motor isn't the same as the little grade ups...neither is Orudios', mind, even if Orry's bigger. The bar is probably a reference to the little power emblem things telling the Zoid's power in the gloriously ambiguous units of "ZEP". Pointytilly 05:32, May 19, 2010 (UTC) i think i figured it out. the motor is similar b/c it needs certain aspects of a grade up motor in order to allow for the gunbluster's weapons to rotate. in a sense the gunbluster has a grade up weapon built into it--Leon35 15:26, May 19, 2010 (UTC) I can always check the motor of my King Liger and Gunbuster (Zoids Fanatic 16:34, May 19, 2010 (UTC)) that's a lot of guns. in the weapons section it list a bunch of different guns, then multibarreled beam cannon then shot gun. are all of those guns in that mess or is that just the multi barreled beam cannon? Also does it litterally have a shotgun? that doesn't sound to ... effective.ZGWolf 22:49, August 12, 2010 (UTC) The whole idea with the Gunbluster was to pound any Zoid at any range. And yes, it has all those weapons. (Zoids Fanatic 01:49, August 13, 2010 (UTC)) Name In accord with the conventions of english > romanised japanese, shouldn't Gun Blaster (legacy) or Gunblaster (NAR) be used over Gunbluster? Slax01 04:16, August 22, 2010 (UTC) The NAR box has the Zoid labled under the name Gunblaster. I for one would like to keep it the same name, under Gunbluster, but if it's name is to be changed, then it should go with the model name, Gunblaster. (Zoids Fanatic 15:28, August 22, 2010 (UTC)) As for one word vs two: What does the NAR instruction manual say? I was under the impression it used two words, despite the box using one. If this is true (and I'm only asserting, not confirming, that this is the case) then it should be mentioned, even if the page isn't moved (which I do believe it should be, with my preference being to use the two word name, so as to keep it in line with pages like Geno Saurer and Death Saurer). Slax01 01:25, August 23, 2010 (UTC) The box calls it Gunblaster". The manual calls it the '''Gun Blaster. (Zoids Fanatic 01:38, August 23, 2010 (UTC)) I like Gunblaster, since it's closer to the dubious-but-popular Gunbluster romanization. However, there does seem to be precedent here for two word names, which may carry more weight than anything else. Pointytilly 02:42, August 23, 2010 (UTC) Moved to Gun Blaster, as per my previous argument, as no objections were raised. Slax01 08:40, September 5, 2010 (UTC) i would have preffered Gunblaster to the seperation, but this is fine as long as redirects are in place--Leon35 12:22, September 5, 2010 (UTC) :We all know that Legacy shouldn't be trusted unless its the only source we have... and the NAR box has "Gunblaster," so we should use that. However- if I remember correctly, our naming standards apply to the most popular western name for the Zoid, would that be bluster or blaster? (Honestly I don't know). Definitely not "Gun Blaster" :@Tilly / Slax - "Gunbluser" isn't a dubious romanization - the NJR box has that right on it. And the precedent for two word names (Geno Saurer, Breaker, Death Saurer) is because the names on the model kit boxes are usually 2 words... however that isn't the case with Gunbluster/blaster.--Azimuth727 16:21, September 5, 2010 (UTC) NJR = new japanese release. Therefore, NJR box = romanisation, unless there is some evidence to the contrary. Also, I have said this before, but Legacy does not deserve to be assumed incorrect for no reason. If there is a reason it can be considered incorrect, then it can be disregarded, but in this case, there is no reason to assume the translation is invalid, as per the instruction manual I referenced above. That said, the only reason I moved this to two words is because no-one bothered to come up with a reason to the contrary. Fanatic said to keep it "bluster", which I am against, and Tilly was indecisive. Therefore, I had to make the call. I hate it that I only got a discussion after I did the action, as it doubles up the workload, but whatever, if you want to move it to one word, go ahead. Slax01 23:13, September 5, 2010 (UTC)